If you re-read Bob's original post, I think Bob was addressing the dx, not
the stations trying to work the dx. It's an excellent point - there were
quite a few dxpeditions this year where the ops just didn't show the
persistence on Topband that they might have and were qrv on other bands
during times when qso might have been possible on Topband. And then there
were the ops who plugged away night after night on 160M through poor
propagation, but when the band opened for a short time, they were right
there and made the most of it.
73,
Barry N1EU
>From: "Garry Shapiro" <garry@ni6t.com>
>To: "Topband Reflector" <topband@contesting.com>
>Subject: RE: Topband: ET3PMW and 7X0DX
To: <topband@contesting.com>
>Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 03:44:58 -0000
>
>Bob:
>
>Excuse me, but IMHO your Point 1 should be modified as follows:
>
>1. being QRV from a QTH from which there is propagation to the DX.
>
>Garry
>
>
> >
> > So, my maybe not so striking observation is that in order of importance
>to
> > achiving success on the band: 1. being QRV. 2. RX capability. 3.
>Output
> > power. Don't get me wrong, a KW never hurts especially under marginal
> > conditions but, let's not discourage potential low band OPS from
> > working 160
> > meters even with small antennas and 100 watts.
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>Topband mailing list
>Topband@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
|